US Prez Election 2012 Thread - Opinions and Discussions

[Drewish]

Gary Johnson!

- Pro-Choice
- Against the wars
- Against Obamacare
- For Gay marriage
- Left his state with a surplus after two terms as governor
- For pot legalization
- The only other candidate who will be on the ballot in all 50 states!

[Coito ergo sum]

Gary Johnson!

- Pro-Choice

Me too

- Against the wars

Even Afghanistan? The one that had like 95% support in 2001?

- Against Obamacare
- For Gay marriage
- Left his state with a surplus after two terms as governor
- For pot legalization
- The only other candidate who will be on the ballot in all 50 states!

Sounds good.

[Drewish]

Gary Johnson!

- Against the wars

Even Afghanistan? The one that had like 95% support in 2001?

Gary Johnson: 'We Got Osama Bin Laden, Let's Get Out Of Afghanistan'

[Coito ergo sum]

Gary Johnson!

- Against the wars

Even Afghanistan? The one that had like 95% support in 2001?

Gary Johnson: 'We Got Osama Bin Laden, Let's Get Out Of Afghanistan'

Oh, so he was for the war, he just thinks we've won it now, and it's time to bring the troops home. I can agree with that.

[Warren Dew]

Gary Johnson!

- Pro-Choice
- Against the wars
- Against Obamacare
- For Gay marriage
- Left his state with a surplus after two terms as governor
- For pot legalization
- The only other candidate who will be on the ballot in all 50 states!

You forgot:

- Guaranteed not to win!

[Warren Dew]

Wisconsin a bad omen?

Obviously, if the recall worked, it would have been sold as a boon to Obama and highly indicative of what will happen in November. Now that the Democrats were soundly thumped in Wisconsin, in an election they called for, they're saying it doesn't matter.

I think it does, though. They lost big in a State they carried in 2008. It has to mean something.

The Democrats really lost to the Tea Party, rather than to the Republicans.

You can see it in the exit polls. The exit polls favored Walker slightly, but still favored Obama over Romney by a large margin. The most important issues were fundamentally Tea Party issues - for example, the exit polls favored "small government" by over 60% - not traditional Republican issues.

If it were Ron Paul on the Republican ticket, Obama would lose the state, no problem. Unfortunately for Romney, the people of Wisconsin seem to see him as a big government Republican.

[Drewish]

Gary Johnson!

- Pro-Choice
- Against the wars
- Against Obamacare
- For Gay marriage
- Left his state with a surplus after two terms as governor
- For pot legalization
- The only other candidate who will be on the ballot in all 50 states!

You forgot:

- Guaranteed not to win!

Only if people refuse to vote for anyone other than the two parties' guys and then bitch about living in a two party system.

[Warren Dew]

Only if people refuse to vote for anyone other than the two parties' guys and then bitch about living in a two party system.

In Gary Johnson's case, the problem is that he's too incompetent to put together a passable campaign. Just look at how he did, compared to fellow libertarian Ron Paul.

The presidency is more than just positions. The president can have the best intentions in the world, and if he's incompetent and unable to put those positions into policy, that can actuallly hurt us.

[Ian]

Nate Silver, brilliant as always:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.co ... more-31071

[Drewish]

Only if people refuse to vote for anyone other than the two parties' guys and then bitch about living in a two party system.

In Gary Johnson's case, the problem is that he's too incompetent to put together a passable campaign. Just look at how he did, compared to fellow libertarian Ron Paul.

The presidency is more than just positions. The president can have the best intentions in the world, and if he's incompetent and unable to put those positions into policy, that can actuallly hurt us.

Yeah cuz he totally screwed over New Mexico

You don't have to vote for him, but I'll never understand the desire of some to dismiss candidates on the grounds of their not being from the two major parties.

[Warren Dew]

Yeah cuz he totally screwed over New Mexico

Palin did a great job as governor of Alaska, too. That doesn't mean she'd make a competent president.

You don't have to vote for him, but I'll never understand the desire of some to dismiss candidates on the grounds of their not being from the two major parties.

I voted for Anderson rather than Reagan or Carter the very first time I was eligible to vote. My main problem with Johnson is that he's a political lightweight, not that he's a third party candidate.

That said, the Anderson campaign made absolutely no difference, so it's also true that voting for a third party candidate, except in rare situations like one of the major parties splitting, is functionally equivalent to not voting at all.

[amused]

I'm totally on with a prez who wears magic underwear!

[Tyrannical]

Rand Paul endorsed Romney the other night, though he didn't look ecstatic about it He added that his father was still his first choice of course
This made more than a few Ron supporters unhappy, they didn't want him to give an endorsement before the convention.

Some Paul supporters still think they can force a brokered convention by getting Paul supporters elected as Romney delegates and then to vote for Paul. Each State has it's own rules on selecting delegates, some are voted on and some are hand picked by the candidate. It's questionable if bound delegates can freely vote, and there does appear to be evidence in National GOP rules and Federal law that supports that view. Paul supporters did manage to steal the majority of delegates in Mitten's home State of Massachusetts after all. Expect some fireworks in Tampa for the convention, I have a feeling this will go down like no other.

[Drewish]

I don't want Paul to win that way (and don't think he really can at this point). Winning in a split or tight race like that? Sure. When there's a clear majority behind Romney? That's just not right. Sorry, but the Paul campaign is over.

[Tyrannical]

I don't want Paul to win that way (and don't think he really can at this point). Winning in a split or tight race like that? Sure. When there's a clear majority behind Romney? That's just not right. Sorry, but the Paul campaign is over.

I can even top that chaos.

Let's say you have a close Presidential election with a very tight electoral college race. A couple of electorates decide to break rank and vote for Paul.
Now no one has the majority, so the election goes to the state's House delegation, where each State has only one vote. That gives big states like California and New York only as much say as small States like Maine or Vermont. Probably wouldn't change anything though, but sounds like fun

Now if we had a credible third party that could prevent electoral college majorities......